GW News: LAS VEGAS OPEN 2025

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

Were they really needed? If you're going to make female Chaos Dwarfs, make them look female. They don't have to be pretty, but we shouldn't have to be piecing clue together based on their names to figure out what they are (not to diminish the good detective work on your part). It just doesn't feel like something that was spawned organically for the purposes of creativity but rather a lame checkbox on some "representation" initiative. Is this the case with all AoS factions now?

Oh yes, there were some female Kharadron models released for their 2nd wave not long ago... particularly this minger to attract girls who like mutilating their noses to the army...




Now, this normally wouldn't be too bad as one could use an alternative head option from the kit or carefully file off the nose ring, but of all the new models teased as part of that wave, why the frak did they have to put HER front and centre on the Battletome cover?

Between this lass and the female Stormcast models with lesbian chav-cuts, GW are really sending the wrong sort of message to women right now...

I thought so, but I started second guessing myself. Does this mean that this is another "essential" book required to field the Tomb Kings in TOW? The campaign rules seem rather optional, but additional unit rules appear to be sort of important.

I'm honestly not sure what they mean by the additional mount rules for Tomb Kings, as all the mounts their characters currently access are available in the Ravening Hordes book... but it'll be interesting to see if they've come up with some new ideas for future mounted character models.

In general though, all the Arcane Journals are optional (except the Cathay one of course if one wants to play that army) - you can play a game of TOW perfectly fine with just the base army lists in the Forces of Fantasy and Ravening Hordes books, and those are the only real essentials... the Journals just add the Armies of Infamy, named characters, additional Magic Items and other things to spice up your games.

Did anything other than Chaos Dwarfs or Tomb Kings catch anyone's eyes?

I liked the look of the Leagues of Votann Wave 2 stuff, but principally for the purposes of writing a 6th Edition Codex for them , and the new Necrons from Kill Team are lovely, as all Necrons are.

Otherwise...

 

[WildColonial Boy]

Meanwhile.....
White Angel miniatures....

I'll say no more....

 

[Killer Angel]

Does it change your mind about them? A new army for @Killer Angel ?

Don't think so.
but if i will ever start a new army for TOW, it will be CD.

 

[Killer Angel]

Between this lass and the female Stormcast models with lesbian chav-cuts, GW are really sending the wrong sort of message to women right now...

Do we wanna talk about Astra Militarum and Ursula Creed?

Even the new model of Lotara Sarrin for HH (with the subtitle "mistress of the warmaster") was imo a missed opportunity

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

Do we wanna talk about Astra Militarum and Ursula Creed?

There's only one Castellan Creed of the Imperial Guard...

Spoiler

...And he is not the Warhammer counterpart of Sandi Toksvig ready to present another episode of QI

Even the new model of Lotara Sarrin for HH (with the subtitle "mistress of the warmaster") was imo a missed opportunity

Hmm... as a cyborg serving the fanatical, blood-crazed World Eaters it would be more difficult to make her suitably feminine, but she could at least have long mechatendrils as hair.

 

[Killer Angel]

Hmm... as a cyborg serving the fanatical, blood-crazed World Eaters it would be more difficult to make her suitably feminine, but she could at least have long mechatendrils as hair.

I would have liked something with a more calm attitude and authoritative presence

After all, she was able to debate with Angron without being killed

 

[Canas]

Do we wanna talk about Astra Militarum and Ursula Creed?

I mean, they were always going to get practical, military style haircuts and wear the basic military gear. Much more than a vaguely female shaped head, and maybe a female catachan, isn't really going to happen for the guard. What more did you expect?

I would have liked something with a more calm attitude and authoritative presence

After all, she was able to debate with Angron without being killed

I mean, she is a follower of Khorne. Calm isn't exactly a description you use for those.

 

[Killer Angel]

I mean, she is a follower of Khorne. Calm isn't exactly a description you use for those.

But she was not hot headed. She was brutally efficient and extremely ruthless.
She stood eye to eye with Angron in his demon form, and that's a feat you can accomplish only through sheer iron will.

The official model imo doesn't depict that.

But maybe it's just me.

 

[Canas]

But she was not hot headed. She was brutally efficient and extremely ruthless.
She stood eye to eye with Angron in his demon form, and that's a feat you can accomplish only through sheer iron will.

The official model imo doesn't depict that.

But maybe it's just me.

I don't think you can really capture that very well in a single model. If you want to capture her staring down Angron you'll need to actually model her staring down Angron. It's the contrast of her small calm form in front of a massive and angry angron that shows that iron will. If you just model her on her own it just becomes a generic commander staring calmly into space. Like the model you linked, the only unique thing about it is the bloody hand painted on it, but the sculpt itself is generic and could be any officer.

To sculpt something like that you need a (mini) diorama.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

There isn't anything inherently wrong with their designs.

I don't think that word "inherently" works in this context. These are all aesthetic design choices, even if they are poor aesthetic design choices. What exactly would be an example an inherently flawed design? Outside of a model physically not fitting together, missing pieces or something of the like, I can't think of anything that could be labelled as inherently flawed. Even the most absurd design choices (i.e. sculpting a nose right above a model's butt) would not meet that criteria and could be explained away by a writer (i.e. the model likes the smell of his own brand). That is to say that the threshold to be considered innately wrong/flawed is pretty tough to reach.

You may not like them, but your complaints essentially boil down to "they're not proper chaos dwarfs". Which is true, but they're also not supposed to be. They're merely a spiritual succesor. You may deem them a failure as they're not close enough to the original in your eyes, but they fit in fine with the broader warhammer ranges. Unlike a beer belly elf, which would only work in bloodbowl, and even by bloodbowl standards that'd be weird.

Yes, at the end of the day, it all comes down to personal aesthetic preferences. There is wiggle room in terms of personal taste, and if you like them go and purchase them. In the same way, I can guarantee that someone would buy models based on the absurd Elf idea I presented (not a lot of people mind you, but chances are that a small number would connect with it)... that doesn't mean that it is a solid design choice.

In terms of not being closing enough to the originals, the Forge World Legion of Azgorh Infernal Guard were a huge departure from the old school big hats. I absolutely love those models and they stand as my favourite Chaos Dwarf variants. Then the Chaos Dwarf blood bowl team was released, and they are a huge departure from said Infernal Guard (paying homage to and updating the old big hat design), and I love them too. I believe a model can deviate and still be fantastic.

They're not chaos dwarves though, they are <legally distinct name I cannot remember>. And perhaps <legally distinct name I cannot remember> simply do not care about beards. Maybe it's part of what makes them legally distinct

Maybe it is an AoS thing

Plus, it'd open up some interesting world building regarding the faction culture.

I'll leave that one to you. AoS lore is not my jam.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

What's the general consensus about the models over on CDO out of interest? I'd like to think the reception would be positive.

I'd say mixed, but skewing more towards the positive. Luckily they conducted a poll exploring this very thing:



I've read through a fair number of the comments and the bull centaurs, hobgoblins and character models seem to be the ones viewed most favorably. A lot of the other stuff is more hit or miss, and opinions vary quite a bit. The no beard thing does seem more unpopular than not, but a few people are on board with it.

Overall, they are a pretty positive forum. I even read a comment where one person didn't care for any of it, but states that he doesn't want to rain on anybody else's parade. A fair number seem happy to have been given some attention and fully brought in a mainline current game. Importantly, even someone doesn't care for the models, the battletome brings them into the game, and there are many third party model options available out there.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Oh yes, there were some female Kharadron models released for their 2nd wave not long ago... particularly this minger to attract girls who like mutilating their noses to the army...

View attachment 164066


Now, this normally wouldn't be too bad as one could use an alternative head option from the kit or carefully file off the nose ring, but of all the new models teased as part of that wave, why the frak did they have to put HER front and centre on the Battletome cover?

Between this lass and the female Stormcast models with lesbian chav-cuts, GW are really sending the wrong sort of message to women right now...



I'm honestly not sure what they mean by the additional mount rules for Tomb Kings, as all the mounts their characters currently access are available in the Ravening Hordes book... but it'll be interesting to see if they've come up with some new ideas for future mounted character models.

In general though, all the Arcane Journals are optional (except the Cathay one of course if one wants to play that army) - you can play a game of TOW perfectly fine with just the base army lists in the Forces of Fantasy and Ravening Hordes books, and those are the only real essentials... the Journals just add the Armies of Infamy, named characters, additional Magic Items and other things to spice up your games.



I liked the look of the Leagues of Votann Wave 2 stuff, but principally for the purposes of writing a 6th Edition Codex for them , and the new Necrons from Kill Team are lovely, as all Necrons are.

Otherwise...

For the record, let me just say that I wish I could like this post more than once!

particularly this minger to attract girls who like mutilating their noses to the army...

Because we all know what young girls are really thinking... "I wish I could be just like that squat flying Lizzo Dwarf just like in AoS!"

Now, this normally wouldn't be too bad as one could use an alternative head option from the kit or carefully file off the nose ring, but of all the new models teased as part of that wave, why the frak did they have to put HER front and centre on the Battletome cover?

I couldn't believe when I saw that. What a terrible cover. They've moved a long ways from the original KO aesthetic. KO used to be my far and away favourite AoS army... I guess I now have to hand over that title to my former second choice.

Between this lass and the female Stormcast models with lesbian chav-cuts, GW are really sending the wrong sort of message to women right now...

Spoiler: did someone mention a message?... perhaps THE MESSAGE!

Don't think so.
but if i will ever start a new army for TOW, it will be CD.

I'm a bit torn. One side of me wants to pull you into the fold. A new Chaos Dwarf general on the forum (and the second place Slann no less!). The other side of me wonders if it would be a good idea to start a legacy army in TOW. Ultimately the best avenue to play Chaos Dwarfs is in Warhammer Proper, Blood Bowl or AoS (not that I would advocate playing AoS ).

 

[J.Logan]

I'm a bit torn. One side of me wants to pull you into the fold. A new Chaos Dwarf general on the forum (and the second place Slann no less!). The other side of me wonders if it would be a good idea to start a legacy army in TOW. Ultimately the best avenue to play Chaos Dwarfs is in Warhammer Proper, Blood Bowl or AoS (not that I would advocate playing AoS ).

Show that there is a market for the Zhaardron ( How annoyed will you be if I start deliberately naming the WFB and TOW versions of Chaos Dwarfs such going forward?) in Old World, it encourages GeeDubs to see that there is a reason to do potentially expand later. And with Old World's release scheme being releasing the older models? Chaos Dwarf fans should want GeeDubs to escalate them from Legacy to main status to get those models back on shelves.

Though as with any Warhammer army, regardless of the game and setting, those 3d printers gonna go BRRRR regardless.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Show that there is a market for the Zhaardron ( How annoyed will you be if I start deliberately naming the WFB and TOW versions of Chaos Dwarfs such going forward?)

I mean, you can refer to them as you wish.

I am the NIGHTBRINGER, proud loyalist to one true champion of wargames, Warhammer Proper. My dedication is unwavering. My post count is unmatched. I am the master of memes. I debate... I troll... I outlast. Undefeated & undisputed. (and modest too)

I know better, but that does not mean that I expect others to as well.

Show that there is a market for the Zhaardron

in Old World, it encourages GeeDubs to see that there is a reason to do potentially expand later. And with Old World's release scheme being releasing the older models? Chaos Dwarf fans should want GeeDubs to escalate them from Legacy to main status to get those models back on shelves.

I think the GW beancounters are deliberately keeping model lines confined within a single game. They don't want crosspollination of models for accounting reasons. Seems like a counterintuitive strategy to me, but that has been talk being brandied about.

Seraphon exist in AoS, so they are a legacy army in TOW.
Skaven exist in AoS, so they are a legacy army in TOW.

It's not only confined to entire armies, but also units. For example, there are Skullcrushers in AoS so there are no Skullcrushers in TOW (even though Skullcrushers were originally a product of WHFB).

It is plausible that the reason why the Chaos Dwarfs were relegated to legacy army status in TOW was because this AoS Chaos Dwarf release was already in the pipeline.

 

[J.Logan]

I think the GW beancounters are deliberately keeping model lines confined within a single game. They don't want crosspollination of models for accounting reasons. Seems like a counterintuitive strategy to me, but that has been talk being brandied about.

A valid point; at the end of the day, I rarely trust corporate entities to be sensible, because time and again I have been shown that the share holders are utterly out of touch with the market for the product they provide and how actually giving said market what they want = MOAR MONEYS!

But one would hope that with completely new models, for Seraphon and now the Zhaardron, that it leaves a space for the older models to be used in the Old World, as the Warriors of Chaos have been. We "accepted" the rationale that this first edition was aimed at being set in the titular continent that we all know as The Old World (and now I'm wondering if there was an actual name for the continent aside from that), thus the absence of Druchii, and lizardmen, and even the narrative of "the Skaven are in their recovery and hidden phase" for the rat bois.

But there is a definite market for those legacy races, and GeeDubs would be FOOLS to ignore it indefinitely!

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

But one would hope that with completely new models, for Seraphon and now the Zhaardron, that it leaves a space for the older models to be used in the Old World, as the Warriors of Chaos have been.

I mean, maybe. But it would require that GW undermines their original proclamation in regards to legacy armies. The problem for Seraphon is pretty dire though, because the big dinos would still overlap.

For those that are TOW players, they can only hope.


I'm in a fortunate position, as I only play a retired game that is completely free from GW meddling. Furthermore, my armies are really well stocked. I don't really need much from GW. Sometimes a model will catch my eye and I may pick up the odd thing here or there, but for the most part, I'm set. All that was missing were some (previously) discontinued models needed in my wife's Wood Elves army, but that has been rectified now.

 

[- Q -]

and the new Necrons from Kill Team are lovely, as all Necrons are.

Are they your favorite Warhammer 40,000 faction?

I liked the look of the Leagues of Votann Wave 2 stuff, but principally for the purposes of writing a 6th Edition Codex for them

You're a busy man. So many books on the go, how do you juggle it all?

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

I think the Infernal Guard do in fact have such utterly scarred faces that they depend upon such things. It's like the unspoken secret of the Infernal Guard, shared to new initiates after they realise the burning has also cost them there beard. 'Don't worry, lad... none of us have beards. We get a discount on beard wigs so none shall ever know that your beard didn't survive. Wear it with pride.'

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

I like how even Chaos Dwarf models that are a mere shadow of their former peak (Legion of Azgorh + Hellcannon crew) and belonging to a substandard game, can still generate pages and pages of glorious discussion.



@Scalenex to @NIGHTBRINGER :

 

[Canas]

I don't think that word "inherently" works in this context. These are all aesthetic design choices, even if they are poor aesthetic design choices. What exactly would be an example an inherently flawed design? Outside of a model physically not fitting together, missing pieces or something of the like, I can't think of anything that could be labelled as inherently flawed. Even the most absurd design choices (i.e. sculpting a nose right above a model's butt) would not meet that criteria and could be explained away by a writer (i.e. the model likes the smell of his own brand). That is to say that the threshold to be considered innately wrong/flawed is pretty tough to reach.

It would be inherently wrong if it didn't fit within the broader AoS range or within the specific faction rainge (or warhammer as a whole since it all shares certain aesthetics). Basicly its inherently wrong if you break internal consistency. So sure, you can make a model with absurd choices, but if you only make 1 such model and everything else looks realistic & down to earth then that model looks out of place.

For example, there's a french company that makes miniatures called raging heroes. Some of the stuff they make are clearly intended to be proxies for GW stuff (or at least are inspired by) and there's some decent stuff in there. However, GW models tend to be much more bulkier than the raging heroes stuff. As a result if you put them next to eachother it looks weird; the proportions are different & the design language is not consistent.

Similarly, bloodbowl allows for more goofyness than any of the main warhammer games, allowing for models like Cindy Piewhistle, rumbelow Sheepskin, or Luthor von Drakenborg. All of which would look absurd in warhammer proper. With silly poses, over the top outfits, and weird nonsensical ways of cheating incorperated into the model.

The HH models have their own design language seperate from 40K. Of course there's some overlap, they're both space marines, and there's a handfull of things that can be used in both games. But for a lot of models its fairly straightforward to tell which belongs where.

I think the GW beancounters are deliberately keeping model lines confined within a single game. They don't want crosspollination of models for accounting reasons. Seems like a counterintuitive strategy to me, but that has been talk being brandied about.

It'd mess up accounting since it'd be impossible to track which game is actually popular then. But more importantly, the games are too similar and would both basicly be in direct competition with eachother. So they probably decided that wouldn't be a sensible thing to do.

Also; ToW seems to very much be going for WHF aesthetics, not really updating a lot of old models & whatever new stuff they do release clearly maintains the old aesthetics. That old style is rather different from AoS. So re-using models isn't really an option either. Which makes it a lot of effort to maintain a faction for both game systems, with little pay-off.